North Carolina's "bathroom law."

A place to bring a contemplative / Dharmic perspective and opinions to current events and politics.
User avatar
Coëmgenu
Posts: 1805
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2016 10:55 pm
Location: Whitby, Canada

Re: North Carolina's "bathroom law."

Post by Coëmgenu » Mon Nov 07, 2016 11:39 pm

ihrjordan wrote:
Coëmgenu wrote:
ihrjordan wrote:It is none of those things. My point in saying the above was to emphasize that the Buddha focused on teachings those with sufficient merit, rather those who merit pity. Could an outcast posses merit enough to alight on the dhamma? Absolutely, but the odds are not stacked in their favor. It is much more likely that one at the op would sooner comprehend.

A psychologist was once asked if he'd rather give council to the rich or to the poor, and he said to the rich because the rich know that money won't solve their problems.
were in the suttas does it say that the Buddha specifically chose wealthy or aristocratic people to preach to? What is your claim that the Buddha's followers were all formerly rich based on?
Its littered throughout the canon. If the Buddha wasn't addressino monks then was probably addressing kings like king Pasenadi or king bimbisara, if not them then Brahmins, if not them then wealthy laymen, if not them then leaders of religious sects etc. Go through the majhima nikaya and tell me where the Buddha is found teaching a criminal a homeless person or a an lgbt.

The Buddha once criticised the brahmins for having sex with women of lower castes. Its in the anguttara nikaya, book of fives i believe. He compared them to dogs who in contrast only fornicate with female dogs and only when the female was in season. Why didn't the Buddha encourage them to spread their wild oats with sudras and chandalas if he was all about egalitarianism?
So you have nothing specific to cite?
世尊在靈山會上拈華示眾眾皆默然唯迦葉破顏微笑世尊云
The Lord dwelt at the Vulture Peak with the assembly and plucked a flower as a teaching. The myriad totality were silent, save for Kāśyapa, whose face cracked in a faint smile. The Lord spoke.
吾有正法眼藏涅槃妙心實相無相微妙法門不立文字教外別傳付囑摩訶迦葉。
I have the treasure of the true dharma eye, I have nirvāṇa as wondrous citta, I know signless dharmatā, the subtle dharma-gate, which is not standing on written word, which is external to scriptures, which is a special dispensation, which is entrusted to Mahākāśyapa.

नस्वातोनापिपरतोनद्वाभ्यांनाप्यहेतुतः

User avatar
ihrjordan
Posts: 826
Joined: Wed Sep 11, 2013 2:42 am

Re: North Carolina's "bathroom law."

Post by ihrjordan » Mon Nov 07, 2016 11:45 pm

No because you aren't intent on listening but rather defending your own viewpoint. The honest eye will see that the majority of the Buddha's encounters were with either monks or people of high social standing. I don't have anything specific to site because one could probably open up to a random sutta in any of the 4 nikayas, make note of who the audience was then confirm this.

Sujith Manoharan
Posts: 44
Joined: Thu Mar 31, 2016 1:57 am

Re: North Carolina's "bathroom law."

Post by Sujith Manoharan » Tue Nov 08, 2016 12:03 am

To be fair, from the Vinaya Pitaka:
Monks, if a eunuch is not ordained, he should not be ordained; if he is ordained, he should be expelled.

Sujith Manoharan
Posts: 44
Joined: Thu Mar 31, 2016 1:57 am

Re: North Carolina's "bathroom law."

Post by Sujith Manoharan » Tue Nov 08, 2016 12:12 am

ihrjordan wrote: The Buddha once criticised the brahmins for having sex with women of lower castes. Its in the anguttara nikaya, book of fives i believe. He compared them to dogs who in contrast only fornicate with female dogs and only when the female was in season. Why didn't the Buddha encourage them to spread their wild oats with sudras and chandalas if he was all about egalitarianism?
Are you referring to this one ?
http://awake.kiev.ua/dhamma/tipitaka/2S ... ggo-e.html

If so, I think the main point of this sutta is to point out the general deterioration of the Brahmins, despite their adherence to rituals and the Vedas. The Buddha doesn't seem to be making a sweeping assessment of social hierarchy.

Sujith Manoharan
Posts: 44
Joined: Thu Mar 31, 2016 1:57 am

Re: North Carolina's "bathroom law."

Post by Sujith Manoharan » Tue Nov 08, 2016 12:18 am

ihrjordan wrote: Its littered throughout the canon. If the Buddha wasn't addressino monks then was probably addressing kings like king Pasenadi or king bimbisara, if not them then Brahmins, if not them then wealthy laymen, if not them then leaders of religious sects etc. Go through the majhima nikaya and tell me where the Buddha is found teaching a criminal a homeless person or a an lgbt.
Angulimala ? Canda ?

I don't agree that the Buddha reserved his discourses only for royalty.

User avatar
Mkoll
Posts: 6440
Joined: Wed Dec 05, 2012 6:55 pm
Location: California

Re: North Carolina's "bathroom law."

Post by Mkoll » Tue Nov 08, 2016 12:22 am

I do recall reading at least one scholar who said that most of the Buddha's followers came from the brahmin and kshatriya classes. That's not to say he didn't teach those who belonged to other classes, quite the contrary.

But class, i.e. social status, is besides the point. The Buddha would teach those who were ready and eager to learn. He was anuttaro purisa damma sarathi—unsurpassed trainer of persons to be tamed. If you were one of those people and went to Him, He would teach you. That's all there is to it, AFAICT.
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa

User avatar
ihrjordan
Posts: 826
Joined: Wed Sep 11, 2013 2:42 am

Re: North Carolina's "bathroom law."

Post by ihrjordan » Tue Nov 08, 2016 12:31 am

Mkoll wrote:I do recall reading at least one scholar who said that most of the Buddha's followers came from the brahmin and kshatriya classes. That's not to say he didn't teach those who belonged to other classes, quite the contrary.

But class, i.e. social status, is besides the point. The Buddha would teach those who were ready and eager to learn. He was anuttaro purisa damma sarathi—unsurpassed trainer of persons to be tamed. If you were one of those people and went to Him, He would teach you. That's all there is to it, AFAICT.
I agree. My point is that social standing is usually (but not always) a good indicator of ones previous spiritual development and therefor potential in this dhamma and discipline. It stands to reason that one who was virtuous and generous in a previous life would be born in a favorable position in the next.

User avatar
ihrjordan
Posts: 826
Joined: Wed Sep 11, 2013 2:42 am

Re: North Carolina's "bathroom law."

Post by ihrjordan » Tue Nov 08, 2016 12:35 am

Sujith Manoharan wrote:
ihrjordan wrote: Its littered throughout the canon. If the Buddha wasn't addressino monks then was probably addressing kings like king Pasenadi or king bimbisara, if not them then Brahmins, if not them then wealthy laymen, if not them then leaders of religious sects etc. Go through the majhima nikaya and tell me where the Buddha is found teaching a criminal a homeless person or a an lgbt.
Angulimala ? Canda ?

I don't agree that the Buddha reserved his discourses only for royalty.
they are the exception rather than the norm. How well do you think the dhamma would be received in a maximum security prison?

Sujith Manoharan
Posts: 44
Joined: Thu Mar 31, 2016 1:57 am

Re: North Carolina's "bathroom law."

Post by Sujith Manoharan » Tue Nov 08, 2016 12:37 am

ihrjordan wrote:
Mkoll wrote:I do recall reading at least one scholar who said that most of the Buddha's followers came from the brahmin and kshatriya classes. That's not to say he didn't teach those who belonged to other classes, quite the contrary.

But class, i.e. social status, is besides the point. The Buddha would teach those who were ready and eager to learn. He was anuttaro purisa damma sarathi—unsurpassed trainer of persons to be tamed. If you were one of those people and went to Him, He would teach you. That's all there is to it, AFAICT.
I agree. My point is that social standing is usually (but not always) a good indicator of ones previous spiritual development and therefor potential in this dhamma and discipline. It stands to reason that one who was virtuous and generous in a previous life would be born in a favorable position in the next.
Also, the rules that deny the Going-Forth to certain people are not really discriminatory, IMO. They were probably framed to ensure the longevity of the Sangha.

Sujith Manoharan
Posts: 44
Joined: Thu Mar 31, 2016 1:57 am

Re: North Carolina's "bathroom law."

Post by Sujith Manoharan » Tue Nov 08, 2016 12:43 am

ihrjordan wrote: they are the exception rather than the norm. How well do you think the dhamma would be received in a maximum security prison?
Aren't we all in a prison ? :)

But, Mkoll has already answered - a receptive mind is the main requirement. To me, the exceptions in the Suttas are striking and notable.

chownah
Posts: 7550
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: North Carolina's "bathroom law."

Post by chownah » Tue Nov 08, 2016 4:00 am

ihrjordan wrote: How well do you think the dhamma would be received in a maximum security prison?
You can find out by googling "teaching buddhism in prisons".
chownah

User avatar
rowboat
Posts: 700
Joined: Sun Aug 22, 2010 5:31 am
Location: Brentwood Bay

Re: North Carolina's "bathroom law."

Post by rowboat » Tue Nov 08, 2016 4:17 am

chownah wrote:
ihrjordan wrote: How well do you think the dhamma would be received in a maximum security prison?
You can find out by googling "teaching buddhism in prisons".
chownah
Please pardon this digression -

Rain soddens what is covered up,
It does not sodden what is open.
Therefore uncover what is covered
That the rain will not sodden it.
Ud 5.5

Meggo
Posts: 94
Joined: Tue May 07, 2013 2:42 pm

Re: North Carolina's "bathroom law."

Post by Meggo » Tue Nov 08, 2016 5:37 am

To many people here playing Lord of the Flies. As if they weren't rapists, murderers, petas, animals and whatever in their countless past lifes.

User avatar
Mr Man
Posts: 3368
Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2011 8:42 am

Re: North Carolina's "bathroom law."

Post by Mr Man » Tue Nov 08, 2016 9:05 am

ihrjordan wrote:
Mkoll wrote:I do recall reading at least one scholar who said that most of the Buddha's followers came from the brahmin and kshatriya classes. That's not to say he didn't teach those who belonged to other classes, quite the contrary.

But class, i.e. social status, is besides the point. The Buddha would teach those who were ready and eager to learn. He was anuttaro purisa damma sarathi—unsurpassed trainer of persons to be tamed. If you were one of those people and went to Him, He would teach you. That's all there is to it, AFAICT.
My point is that social standing is usually (but not always) a good indicator of ones previous spiritual development and therefor potential in this dhamma and discipline.
This, of course, is pure speculation on your part. And also a noxious view to hold in my opinion.

User avatar
Coëmgenu
Posts: 1805
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2016 10:55 pm
Location: Whitby, Canada

Re: North Carolina's "bathroom law."

Post by Coëmgenu » Tue Nov 08, 2016 12:07 pm

Mr Man wrote:
ihrjordan wrote:
Mkoll wrote:I do recall reading at least one scholar who said that most of the Buddha's followers came from the brahmin and kshatriya classes. That's not to say he didn't teach those who belonged to other classes, quite the contrary.

But class, i.e. social status, is besides the point. The Buddha would teach those who were ready and eager to learn. He was anuttaro purisa damma sarathi—unsurpassed trainer of persons to be tamed. If you were one of those people and went to Him, He would teach you. That's all there is to it, AFAICT.
My point is that social standing is usually (but not always) a good indicator of ones previous spiritual development and therefor potential in this dhamma and discipline.
This, of course, is pure speculation on your part. And also a noxious view to hold in my opinion.
The thing people don't seem to be grasping is that no one is saying kamma doesn't often work like this. But people wealth is not corelated to their capacities for profound self-reflection. Otherwise Buddha's preaching would have been exclusively to devas in sense-pleasure heavens.

People are simply saying it is deplorable behaviour to make value-judgements as to peoples' capacities and character because you perceive them to have had bad kamma in the past. It's literally just common sense.

Besides, only the Buddha truly understands kamma. All of this speculation is about perceived kamma, not actual kamma. On the subject of Buddha's unique understanding of kamma, we even had a quote from Mike substantiating that earlier.

If I came on this board and said that X or Y race doesn't deserve basic human dignity, doesn't deserve equity, because "obviously they are terrible people because they weren't born white, their bad kamma is manifest in their skin" I would be booted off this forum in a second, for good reason. I can already predict a probably nonsense choir of "but people are born black/asian/etc, people aren't born trans/gay/whatever" but that is massively cognitively dissonant with the rest of the conversation thus far, and hopefully people realize that before jumping on that tired cliché of an argument.
世尊在靈山會上拈華示眾眾皆默然唯迦葉破顏微笑世尊云
The Lord dwelt at the Vulture Peak with the assembly and plucked a flower as a teaching. The myriad totality were silent, save for Kāśyapa, whose face cracked in a faint smile. The Lord spoke.
吾有正法眼藏涅槃妙心實相無相微妙法門不立文字教外別傳付囑摩訶迦葉。
I have the treasure of the true dharma eye, I have nirvāṇa as wondrous citta, I know signless dharmatā, the subtle dharma-gate, which is not standing on written word, which is external to scriptures, which is a special dispensation, which is entrusted to Mahākāśyapa.

नस्वातोनापिपरतोनद्वाभ्यांनाप्यहेतुतः

Locked

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 15 guests